Linking to a past Trope Repair Shop thread that dealt with this page: Split off "Good Versus Evil".
, started by DragonQuestZ on Feb 16th 2011 at 12:30:50 AM
Not really. Seems like a Trope Talk topic, though.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Complete Arse(nal)
The C&C Tiberium Series example is directly contradicted by this page. What should be done?
Why You Shouldn't Eat Meat Hide / Show Replies
MagBas
- Dragon Ball Z. While debatable in Vegeta, most of the Z fighters are really good and nice guys. Moreover, enemies are evil, crazy and monstrous sociopaths willing to destroy worlds.
Why this example was removed?
Hide / Show Replies
I cannot see a reason why. DBZ is one of the most clear-cut shows out there, other than Vegeta and Fat Buu. Even formerly evil characters wind up pretty much "white" when they become good.
Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.
From ATT, here's why it's Black-and-White Morality: There's always two sides, one straight up good, one straight up bad. Piccolo is a bit of a Bad Butt by DBZ but he's still unquestionably on the side of good for the entire series. That there might be evil "in him" doesn't change the fact that he's purely on the side of good in the larger conflict. Characters don't have to be all-loving heroes for it to be Black and White Morality. The issue is the larger conflicts. In every conflict, there's generally two sides: The Z Fighters (clearly good) and whoever they're fighting, who's clearly bad. "If there are any morally ambiguous or grey characters around (such as an Anti-Hero or Worthy Opponent), they will eventually shift firmly to one side or the other" which is precisely what happens to every ambiguous character.
There's nothing ever indicating that the heroes are doing anything morally ambiguous, or that maybe Freiza has it right. There's the good guys, there's the bad guys. The good guys aren't entirely caricatures of a Shining Knight, and the villains aren't ALL cartoonishly evil Complete Monsters, but they're still clearly one the sides of good or bad respectively. I think that part of the issue is that people equate Black-and-White Morality with characters being one-dimensional, which isn't necessarily the case.
Edited by 156.33.241.6 Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.
I must confess to jumping the gun and removing it after reading the discussion on Ask The Tropers - but before the discussion had reached a consensus. I'm sorry for this. Please feel free to put it back.
No worries. And any way you cut it, the example that you did pull was really quite wrong. I'm going to wait for more discussion before I add a writeup of my own.
Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.
Bump. Any other thoughts?
Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.
Readding a reworded entry, if no one objects.
- Dragon Ball Z:In every conflict, there's generally two sides: The Z Fighters (clearly good) and whoever they're fighting, who's clearly bad. Even though many characters may start out somewhat ambiguous, being an Anti-Hero or even an outright villain, they firmly cement themselves on the side of good before too long. Even Vegeta who spends the series in a Heel–Face Revolving Door settles into the side of good eventually. At no point is there ever a question as to whether the Arc Villain du jour is justified or anything but a villain.
The image being used so far from Fire Emblem Tellius is really screwed up. That's showing Elincia from FE 10 in a completely different situation. Plus the camera focus is on Leanne. Isn't there something we can use from FE 9?
SEGA!Rockruff
I wish real life was black and white, too.
Intended to embody the Beware of Vicious Dog trope plus Super-Speed. Yup. Hide / Show Replies
Should Fates' entry for Hoshido and Nohr potentially be moved over to White-and-Grey Morality? Nohr's the clear aggressor for the conflict, but unlike most black-and-white conflicts, you can't reasonably call Nohr evil so much as literally guided at the whims of a puppet-king in Garon who in turn is brainwashed and possessed by Anankos, and most of the evil Nohrians are ones Garon directly chooses to enforce, with most of the Nohrian royals being on the side of good than evil.
Just curious about what you think.